PARKER v. BRUCE DAVIS et al, No. 1:2018cv16129 - Document 2 (D.N.J. 2018)
Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 11/21/2018. (cry,N.M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
PARKER v. BRUCE DAVIS et al Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ___________________________________ : WAYNE PARKER, : : Petitioner, : Civ. No. 18-16129 (NLH) : v. : OPINION : THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE : OF NEW JERSEY, et al., : : Respondents. : ___________________________________: APPEARANCE: Wayne Parker, No. 535295 New Jersey State Prison P.O. Box 861 Trenton, NJ 08625 Petitioner Pro Se HILLMAN, District Judge Plaintiff Wayne Parker, an inmate presently incarcerated at the New Jersey State Prison in Trenton, New Jersey, seeks to bring this Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, without prepayment of the filing fee or the submission of an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See ECF No. 1 (Petition). Filing Fee The filing fee for a petition for writ of habeas corpus is $5.00. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 54.3(a), the filing fee is required to be paid at the time the petition is presented for filing. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 81.2(b), whenever a Dockets.Justia.com prisoner submits a petition for writ of habeas corpus and seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, that petitioner must submit (a) an affidavit setting forth information which establishes that the petitioner is unable to pay the fees and costs of the proceedings, and (b) a certification signed by an authorized officer of the institution certifying (1) the amount presently on deposit in the prisoner’s prison account and, (2) the greatest amount on deposit in the prisoner’s institutional account during the six-month period prior to the date of the certification. If the institutional account of the petitioner exceeds $200, the petitioner shall not be considered eligible to proceed in forma pauperis. L. Civ. R. 81.2(c). Here, Petitioner did not prepay the $5.00 filing fee for a habeas petition as required by Local Civil Rule 54.3(a), nor did Petitioner submit an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Clerk of the Court will be ordered to administratively terminate this action, without filing the Complaint or assessing a filing fee. 1 1 Plaintiff will Such an administrative termination is not a “dismissal” for purposes of the statute of limitations, and if the case is reopened pursuant to the terms of the accompanying Order, it is not subject to the statute of limitations time bar if it was originally submitted timely. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (prisoner mailbox rule); Papotto v. Hartford Life & Acc. 2 be granted leave to apply to re-open within 30 days so long as he complies with the requirement to either pay the filing fee or submit a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis. An appropriate Order follows. Dated: November 21, 2018 At Camden, New Jersey s/ Noel L. Hillman NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. Ins. Co., 731 F.3d 265, 275-76 (3d Cir. 2013) (collecting cases and explaining that a District Court retains jurisdiction over, and can re-open, administratively closed cases). 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
